Daniel, it is obvious that you are not interested in having a meaningful discussion about these things. Your obsessive cries of "document" and "relevance?" are not done out of a good faith desire to have a meaningful discussion but instead are little more than self-serving obfuscation, and I think everyone sees it. If you want to raise up a recreational drug user, sexual libertine, and theistic, self-affirming occultist as a reasonably reliable guide to Buddhism, then you can do that - but don't be surprised when those who take the Buddha's words seriously react with a certain disbelief, and don't be surprised when they become disinterested in epistemological games instead of real, tangible discussion.

Gain and loss, status and disgrace, censure and praise, pleasure and pain:these conditions among human beings are inconstant,impermanent, subject to change.

If I may digress from Crowley for a moment - it just occurred to me, that Devadatta (the Buddha's cousin) had attained supernormal powers, but without being firmly established in discernment (he had not attained stream entry, so was liable to fall back). So unless one had at least attained stream entry or above, magical powers could be risky, even dangerous, because they could inflate one's sense of self, and if someone used those powers to 'get what they want' in the sensual realm - possibly impacting on other beings in the process - there could be a risk of getting involved in some heavy kamma. If without a high degree of virtue and wisdom, one's magical powers could end up dragging one to hell! (Possibly.) On the other hand. one could use them exclusively for good instead, and help one's fellow beings. But still, unless one had entered the stream, sounds like a risky place to be.

I recall reading that in the ancient 'Mystery Schools', knowledge was guarded and not revealed to just anyone, for that very reason - to keep unworthy or immoral persons from having access to potentially destructive powers. I can see a parallel with Buddhist practice, in that one's samadhi should be informed by the other seven limbs of the Path, and not attempted in isolation, merely for the sake of 'blissing out' or whatever. If it's not done with right view, it won't be noble right samadhi. (As I currently understand it):

The Blessed One said: "Now what, monks, is noble right concentration with its supports & requisite conditions? Any singleness of mind equipped with these seven factors — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, & right mindfulness — is called noble right concentration with its supports & requisite conditions.

Keep it simple. Anything that diverges from the below is in my opinion off topic to the "Magick" portion of the OP.

I. DEFINITION:

MAGICK

is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will.*

(Illustration: It is my Will to inform the World of certain facts within my knowledge. I therefore take "magical weapons," pen, ink, and paper; I write "incantations"—these sentences—in the "magical language" i.e. that which is understood by people I wish to instruct. I call forth "spirits" such as printers, publishers, booksellers, and so forth, and constrain them to convey my message to those people. The composition and distribution is thus an act of

MAGICK

by which I cause Changes to take place in conformity with my Will.)....

III. THEOREMS:

1. Every intentional act is a Magical Act.†

(Ilustration: See "Definition" above.)

* In one sense Magick may be said to be the name given to Science by the vulgar.

† By "intentional" I mean "willed." But even unintentional acts so seeming are not truly so. Thus, breathing is an act of the Will-to-live.

Properly distinguish among Crowley's personal ideas/opinions/behaviors, Magick proper, Systematic Thelema and the order of the A.'.A.'., which does not require, or to my knowl-dge even encourage, sex magick, drug use, or anything else generally considered "unethical" by the the more dogmatic minds among us.

When you fail to make these distinctions you are in my opinion off topic from the "Magick" portion of the OP.

Just keep breathing in and out like this. Don't be interested in anything else. It doesn't matter even if someone is standing on their head with their ass in the air. Don't pay it any attention. Just stay with the in-breath and the out-breath. Concentrate your awareness on the breath. Just keep doing it. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Just_Do_It_1_2.php

Daniel, it is obvious that you are not interested in having a meaningful discussion about these things. Your obsessive cries of "document" and "relevance?" are not done out of a good faith desire to have a meaningful discussion but instead are little more than self-serving obfuscation, and I think everyone sees it. If you want to raise up a recreational drug user, sexual libertine, and theistic, self-affirming occultist as a reasonably reliable guide to Buddhism, then you can do that - but don't be surprised when those who take the Buddha's words seriously react with a certain disbelief, and don't be surprised when they become disinterested in epistemological games instead of real, tangible discussion.

How did you figure all this out? It's like you know me inside out. It's amazing how accurately you've understood my intentions and the deepest meanings of my behaviors. You must have incredible mind-reading talents. You're so good at it, you've even divined everyone elses intentions too! I'm extremely impressed. You've especially done a good job of seeing just how much I doubt the Buddhavacana. You've even proven once and for that with enough faith and conviction that it's possible to abuse the distinction between appearance and reality with impunity. Good show. Bravo! Bravo!! What will you do for your next illusion? Card tricks? Pull a rabbit out your hat? Stick a needle through a baloon? I can't wait.

manas wrote:If I may digress from Crowley for a moment - it just occurred to me, that Devadatta (the Buddha's cousin) had attained supernormal powers, but without being firmly established in discernment (he had not attained stream entry, so was liable to fall back). So unless one had at least attained stream entry or above, magical powers could be risky, even dangerous, because they could inflate one's sense of self, and if someone used those powers to 'get what they want' in the sensual realm - possibly impacting on other beings in the process - there could be a risk of getting involved in some heavy kamma. If without a high degree of virtue and wisdom, one's magical powers could end up dragging one to hell! (Possibly.) On the other hand. one could use them exclusively for good instead, and help one's fellow beings. But still, unless one had entered the stream, sounds like a risky place to be.

I recall reading that in the ancient 'Mystery Schools', knowledge was guarded and not revealed to just anyone, for that very reason - to keep unworthy or immoral persons from having access to potentially destructive powers. I can see a parallel with Buddhist practice, in that one's samadhi should be informed by the other seven limbs of the Path, and not attempted in isolation, merely for the sake of 'blissing out' or whatever. If it's not done with right view, it won't be noble right samadhi. (As I currently understand it):

The Blessed One said: "Now what, monks, is noble right concentration with its supports & requisite conditions? Any singleness of mind equipped with these seven factors — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, & right mindfulness — is called noble right concentration with its supports & requisite conditions.

What evidence do you have that Crowley didn't enter the stream? Are you psychic? A time traveller? A time travelling psychic? Stream enterers are far from perfect and capable of making a lot of mistakes--up to seven lifetimes worth, to be precise.

polarbuddha101 wrote:So drinking water is magick if I will to drink water. I guess we're all magicians.

Yes.

polarbuddha101 wrote:But I now find this all very mundane.

Finally. Keep it simple, make the proper distinctions, and support your statements with evidence and verifiable citations--otherwise you'll get caught up in gossip, hearsay, slander, rumors, libel and dogmatism.

Daniel, you stopped making meaningful arguments or constructive contributions to this thread (and honestly, to a lot of Dhammawheel in general) a while ago, and have descended into a lot of petty sniping. Perhaps one would make a far better argument for the efficacy of magick thought by acting in ways that reflect spiritual development instead of arrogance and snide dismissal.

Gain and loss, status and disgrace, censure and praise, pleasure and pain:these conditions among human beings are inconstant,impermanent, subject to change.

Daniel, you stopped making meaningful arguments or constructive contributions to this thread (and honestly, to a lot of Dhammawheel in general) a while ago, and have descended into a lot of petty sniping. Perhaps one would make a far better argument for the efficacy of magick thought by acting in ways that reflect spiritual development instead of arrogance and snide dismissal.

That's not a new trick. That's the same ol' LY acting like he's superior to anyone he misinterprets. SInce you seem to know so much more about Buddhadhamma and how Buddhists should act than me or those who'd prefer to develop spiritually via magick, would you have us follow you around on your high-horse shoveling it's pretentious pucks?

Have you read Perdurabo?

And I thought puritanism was only for Christians. Pardon me your Holier-Than-Thouness.

Have you read Perdurabo?

You seem to have a fetish for seeing your trifling, opinions in type.

Have you read Perdurabo?

"Honestly"? So now you're being honest? Does that mean you were dishonest before?

Have you read Perdurabo?

If I were dismissing you, you'd be completely ignored; and what you call "snideness" and "arrogance" I call flicking at flies.